relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine

‘A’ -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘Apple’

April 1, 2015 By clarkscottroger

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

…’ello*

Welcome to the First of the ‘Hey-it’s-Me’ April Blog Challenge. We invite you to join us for the month of April as we write our way to glory, prosperity and membership in the Herd. For the next 31.. 28 ..until May 1st, allow us to regale you with adventures and insight, stories and parables and the occasional bon mot, as we attempt to present a view of life, as seen through the unique, helpful and totally fun, lens of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers).

(excuse me… I just pasted the above photo into the Post. I must confess, though I’ve used this image before, I was not aware that it was from the Sistine Chapel. although we are not on the Letter ‘C’ for clarks, my enjoyment of learning a new, if not of questionable value, fact is a primary characteristic of the… ‘Outsider personality type’. whatever)

So, why ‘Apple’? why not Anticipation or Ancillary or, hell…. Anaconda? Well, wait. Anticipation was, in fact, the first ‘A’ word I thought to use in our little blog Challenge.

Hey new Readers! There’s a lot to learn in order to be able to use the Wakefield Doctrine as a tool for better understanding the people in your world. Nothing overly technical, or esoteric (ok, maybe just a touch of the esoteria), simply learn the characteristics of the three worldviews, (which is how we refer to the three personality types in our theory). However! if you want something that will really flatten your learning curve, following is an example of the Doctrine being applied:

‘…I just took a break from writing this Post (right at the end of the ‘So, why Apple? sentence.) I had a scratch-off lottery ticket that I got yesterday at the fast station. As I was carefully removing that semi-metallic coating, to see if I won anything, I realized that how I approached as mundane and seemingly inconsequential task as scratching a lottery ticket not only was a reflection of my predominant worldview, but also illustrated how the experience of ‘Anticipation’ was manifested in my personal reality! The vast majority of these ‘games’ have you uncover 4 or 5 numbers (or symbols) and if there is a match, then the price (also hidden) under that match is your reward. I think we will all agree there is a sense/feeling/state of anticipation involved in this exercise. hey! screw the long explanation. here’s a photo the actual lottery ticket that I am basing my first Wakefield-to Doctrine blog Challenge Post on:

New Readers?? you still with us? That’s great! While most of the people who enjoy using the Wakefield Doctrine are able to look at this photo and say, ‘damn! that there is the non-winning lottery ticket of a clark, for sure!’ I will tell you why and, in the process of doing so, let you decide if I shoulda stuck with ‘A-is-for-Anticipation’, as opposed to ‘A-is-for-them-naked-people-on-the-ceiling-of-an old-church’.
…so you have a ticket and you believe what it says, ‘Win up to $2,000!’ but you don’t know that for a fact. You realize that you may have wasted a dollar. There’s the anticipation (which, astute Readers realize, contains yet another insight into the world of the Outsider)… so how do you manage the excitement? More importantly, how do you manage the possible disappointment? You carefully scratch the necessary parts of the card that informs you of your impending emotional state, you do not, I repeat, do not do anything that might heighten the emotional state.

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine.

the Wakefield Doctrine is a unique, engaging and fun way to look at the behavior of the people in our lives. Through the use of the tools that comprise the Doctrine, we will at long last be able to answer the question, ‘Now why on earth would they go and act like that? I really thought I knew them better!’

Before you leave. We have friends who are writing some genuinely good stuff for the ‘My-Name-is-Not-Zucchini’ April Blog Challenge do yourself a favor and go read their Posts:

Christine and Dyanne Kristi and Val and…. of course, Z

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: Personal, personality types, psychology of personality, relationships, self-development, self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine

Tue Comments -the Wakefield Doctrine- …and Tue answers (plus…)

March 24, 2015 By clarkscottroger

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

(from this weekend’s ‘hop… a comment from Lizzi regarding a statement that was made about (a) clarks capability to engage in social interaction. the block quotes being the thread)

Lizzi:

“…the thing we don’t have, is that natural inclination to participate in the commerce of social interaction ” ORLY? (L.)

“But…I LOVE making connections and talking to people. Perhaps I’m more scottian than I think.” (L.)

I did not say ‘make connections’ I used the words: ‘…participate in the commerce of social interaction’ (c)

we clarks loves to make connections… we are better at it, (making, discovering, illustrating and generally, pointing out to anyone near, the connections that exist between all things), than scotts and rogers are, if for no other reason than the fact that we are on the outside looking in/over/at the world. Who better to see connections, than the Outsider? (And, yes, I do note that you used the word ‘make’ we’ll come back to that.)
‘commerce‘ in the above statement is meant to imply an exchange that occurs between people when interacting within a social context. It’s said that, ‘clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel’ and, from this, we can view this (social) exchange as a bartering among people. a scott will (offer) to do things: play games, yell at people, chase down those who would flee, make people do things… a roger is aware of the things that people feel attachment to, fear the effects of, or covet a place that another may occupy… and a clark, well, a clark knows stuff, creates (that which did not previously exist) and, above all, clarks see the inter-relatedness (the connections) among the parts and things and people of the world (all three worlds, if we’re to be accurate).

Trouble is…. clarks give their thing of value away for free. a clark is said to be the most generous and (willing to) share of the three personality types, ( “...hey did you know? …hey, I learned the coolest thing the other day, …by the way, you want to hear something really neat?“) which one might conclude is a good thing. Unfortunately, not counting gift-giving, most people do not place a large value on things that are offered without a price. In this ‘commerce’ of social interaction there is (a) bartering going on and clarks suffer from 2 very significant weaknesses:

we learn and know and discover things, (mostly the connections among things), and recognize the limitlessness of this ‘commodity’ and are not concerned with getting an equal value in exchange (because we can always find more)
we do not (normally) demand the highest price in exchange of what we offer (in this commerce), because the one thing a clark fears the most, avoids at all costs is ‘scrutiny’ (and, yes, I will stop at this point and let the questions create themselves)

…so, that is a little additional Reply to our friend Lizzi’s Comment

******************************************

Denise:

“this morning my question concerns rogers…..what happens when a roger loses his/her “rogerian expression” (not through choice)?” (D.)

good question! in part because (the) ‘answer’ is an illustration of how the Wakefield Doctrine offers multiple uses, (i.e. fun and insight), for all of us. It, (the Wakefield Doctrine), is a metaphor and it’s an analog that allows us to see the world from another perspective. And, because we have these additional perspectives, we can frame our understanding different ways (fun)… ‘she is such a scott! you could see her nose twitching as soon as she stepped into the meeting hall full of engineers!‘… ‘I saw two clarks engaged in a conversation the other night… I’m pretty sure I did, but, of course nothing, including the logic of their exchange, can escape the gravitational pull of the black hole of two clarks in conversation‘ you know, like that!

so Denise’s question can be interpreted as: can a person lose the realness of their personal reality? This can also be framed as: does the set of strategies and coping mechanisms that are the product of our growing up and developing in one of the three worldviews (that of the Outsider/clark, the world of the Predator/scott or the reality of the Herd Member/roger) eventually wear thin, become less and less the personal expression of how a person relates themselves to the world around them… can age (or circumstances) diminish the clarity of expression of (a) person’s personality type?

the best answer must start with a question: what is the ‘rogerian expression’? (The short, but nevertheless useful answer is: ‘the rogerian expression is that which makes a roger feel as an individual while remaining a part of the Herd (which, by definition, does not recognize individual individuality…. ‘) lol yes, more to follow.

****************************************

from the blogger formerly known as zoe (tbfkaz):

When I started reading Denise’s question and your answer I thought you were gonna answer the question ive been asking since I met you! Did you answer it? I think you may have avoided it and reworked the question! E for evolution. …can life circumstances cause a personal evolution into another predominant personality type? Not just we all do stuff sometimes. ..???????? Whaddya think?

No, no I did not. Where I am heading, (with Denise’s question), is a consideration of what ‘the rogerian expression’* is and what happens when it diminishes (as has been observed in aging rogers), all in the service of a better understanding of a) the nature of the three worldviews and, 2) by inference, what is the potential value to self-improving ourselves? are we to gain by better understanding of (the) characteristic of (one of) the three worldviews .

But, addressing what I hear is your question…. can we move, evolve or otherwise go from worldview-to-worldview, personality type-to-personality type? the current answer is, ‘no’ the current answer will have to wait for later in the day, as it is quite involved (i.e. I don’t have the rhetorical skills to concisely express the idea that these worldviews are real, the world is as described, it is not my ‘choice’ to act as would an Outsider…. my acts (as an Outsider) are appropriate to the world, the reality that I am experiencing today, (in fact, the reality I was faced with as a small, young life form)…. having said that, there is an argument to be made for ‘catastrophic’ changes in one’s life and, therefore, (possibly), a change in the character of a person’s predominant worldview. You might be thinking, “yeah, sure, but what about your much-vaunted secondary aspects, what about those? huh? well… answer me, dammit!!!” (lol) the key element to our ‘behavior’, is the energy that is involved…. (no, the following probably will not make any, ‘standalone’, sense….), if our behavior is not related to the world around us in a way that produces/conducts/returns energy, then it is a fad, an affectation and has nothing to do with a worldview…. (more to follow)

you know, I was just re-reading this Post and next month’s ‘Apples-to-Zuchinni Blog Challenge’, will be very productive provided the right words are found. Clearly there exists a need for a comprehensive yet simple outline of our little personality theory, especially now with newer Readers such as Val and Lisa and them joining us in our pursuit of better understanding the world around us. ya know?

* not to be confused with ‘a rogerian expression’!

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: Personal, personality types, predicting human behavior, psychology of personality, relationships, self-development, self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine

phfridae wapup -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘Friday, the most sought-after day of the workweek’

March 20, 2015 By clarkscottroger

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

Hey, before I forget, tonight in a box at the bottom of this here Post here, I will paste in the link to the Friday Night Vidchat. Click on the link and provided you have downloaded the google hangout app, you will be on line with the Wakefield Doctrine and them. (Depending on who else stops in), you will have an enjoyable and interesting time, courtesy of 21st Century technology.

short, little post this morning. 1 request and 1 cool insight into the rogerian worldview.

I’m leaning towards doing the ‘3 to Bee Blog Challenge’ this coming April (April motto: ‘yeah, go ahead dream…she’ll forget you by Memorial Day‘*) and my theme will be the Wakefield Doctrine. The question I have, does anyone know of anything like a word generator that can produce random words, but allows one to enter the first letter? (My second thought is that I need to approach the month as, ‘The ABCs of the Wakefield Doctrine’… which, if I’m successful will leave me with something useful at the end of the Blues Challenge…. your thoughts?
ok, so we all know that the Wakefield Doctrine provides a description of the three worldviews, (personal realities) of clarks, scotts and rogers… and (these descriptions) are accurate and detailed enough to permit us to …kinda scare people with our insight into their personal lifes (true story: back in the beginning of my blogging, when I met someone online who I knew their worldview from chatting with them** I’d sometimes say things like, ‘I know what’s on the floor of your bedroom closet’ (this being a clarklike female) and I’d describe the clunky but oh-so-comfortable boots and the sensible but worn shoes for work… etc and 9 times out of 10, they’d be all, ‘hold on! how can you know that‘ (eventually more reasonable people around me at the time, Denise and Molly, said, ‘uh, clark? maybe you might want to lay off on the ‘I know you’ thing until they get a little more comfortable with you and your Doctrine thingie…’ (lol and yes, I did take their advice) anyway… back to the rogerian worldview. While we know enough about the personal reality of our rogerian friends to identify other rogers, there is a level of understanding that we can only acquire by inference. A good example is ‘referential authority’.
(I just ran out of time. I’ll try to link to the post that initiated this insight and I’ll certainly try to carve out the time to add to this Post. Failing that, I guess you’ll just need to join us on the vidchat tonight.)

*************************************************************************************
* https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/gqpcmemltfmmek2vipvh477oeia *
* *
*************************************************************************************

* seriously, I have no idea

** well, yeah… it is possible to infer a person’s predominant worldview on the basis of the written word and/or chatting on line… just takes practice, yo

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, predicting human behavior, psychology of personality, relationships, self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine

tjeursdae -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘talkin shop with Cyndi-lou, zoeta, Val and them’

March 19, 2015 By clarkscottroger

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

Now I know we all ( from their commentation, Cynthia and zoe and Val ) agree that, if there were one day (of the workweek) that is most conducive to sitting back for a minute and ‘talking shop’, it surely has to be Thursdays! (….Lisa you will agree with us?…. there are a number of us, perhaps enough to constitute, dare I say it… a herd?) So, lets do this thing. (And just to show you that I can get causal…. casual! casual! I’ll bring on the comic sans! nothing says, ‘we’re just having a conversation among friends as ‘the comic sans’, right?)

there! First shop topic! hey rogers (and anyone with a strong secondary rogerian aspect), a question! Do the Readers here at the Wakefield Doctrine possess sufficient intra-allegiance to comprise, constitute or, otherwise be a Herd? My thought is ‘no’, at least in terms of how I might conceive of a Herd¹…. anyone else?

second shop topic: the role of (a) blog in real life. I’m considering the A to Z Challenge. Looks like fun. But the aspect that everyone seem to mention, the ‘omg! a Post every day except Sunday’… that’s not exciting me. However, the ‘join in with others, be a real blogger, just like your vfriends are doing… it’ll help you bond with them and such²‘ holds some attraction for me. I’m still trying to make up my mind. That being said, I’m looking for words to associate with the letters of the alphabet, because, in all due modesty, it’s not a question whether I can write a Post everyday, it’s really a question of which word (for the letter of the day) would I use to best illustrate my theme (the Wakefield Doctrine)?

shop topic three: z has what she thinks is the answer to the question posed yesterday, i.e. Taylor Swift’s predominant worldview. She (zoe not Taylor) is, undoubtedly correct, such is her understanding of our little personality theory, however, assuming that there might be Readers reluctant to state their call (for her worldview)…. allow me to re-emphasize how we look at this very common, fun and educational exercise (figuring out a person’s worldview). The answer (which worldview) is not so important, why you pick the one that you did is. I’m totally serious about this… I want to hear the reasons, the evidence that supports your choice, because this whole damn thing is about perspectives and perceptions…
The recommended approach is to narrow it down to 2 worldviews, (find the ‘no frickin way’ worldview and eliminate that one), our Ms Swift is tough, not just because she’s a performer. I ended up eliminating ‘scott‘ because, even though her eyes are striking there is no hunger in them…. (see ‘the eyes of a scott’ in the section on scotts)… so that left clark and roger…. clothes are a bit funky (a clarklike female trait)… but I don’t see the ….slump to the posture….the fashion choices are kinda well, fashionable, so that does not speak to a clark…. I’m gonna go with roger… only because there is something calculated in how she appears to be relating herself to the world around her…. So, that’s my reasoning

Out of time…. one last topic: vidchat anyone? Friday sometime from 7:00 pm EDT on…

1) further explication of my answer and my Answer: as a clark, a ‘Herd of clarks‘ is not a possibility, but, as Clark, I can see rogers (and scotts) gather here at and constitute a group-of-coinciding-interests, and thats almost a Herd, right?

2) god! if I had a dollar for every time that thought possessed my mind during my youth… and you know, I’m not, in fact, saying that it is a false or bad thing for a clark to think… the danger lies in expectations…. for a clark, expectations are a drug…the bad kind, addictive kind, with a decreasing payoff and an increasing cost hey! topic for the A to Z yes?? for the Letter E I’d like Expectations, Pat!

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: Personal, personality types, relationships, self-development, self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine

Mid_week Post -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘it’s fun and it’ll help you have a better today’

March 18, 2015 By clarkscottroger

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

The Wakefield Doctrine can be fun.

The Wakefield Doctrine can help you do better today.

Hey, if you’re new to the Doctrine, lets talk about what you do after (stumbled over) this blog. Wait, don’t laugh (scott), don’t sneer (roger) and clark, wait hold up, don’t go off half prepared.

Damn! I had a really fun Post and then realized that I have to limit my reprints! Shit!

Nothing in the Rules against excerpts!!*

But the Doctrine will take the position that old people will show the characteristics of their individual types very clearly.

clarks will age the least, ’cause they have been old from the start
scotts will appear to slow down the least, until they fall over dead
rogers will get even crankier, even though most laws of physics say that is not even possible (except for the ones that are not… we have Kristi and a few of the other rogers to thank for their example of variations in the expression of the rogerian worldview) (which is simply… more…not more-additional, more-of-the-thing-itself)
clarks who by definition have missed the whole point of Life, will get increasingly active as they age
scotts will not notice the physical effects of aging when it starts, the psychological effects they have never noticed
rogers will sit more, but they will be the most compliant guests in the home, until they stop getting visitors

You know, speaking of age… time does impart change (despite what rogers may wish), and while it is all too easy (or tempting or seemingly necessary) to point out, things are different now. Take live musical performances (please! bar ump bump). I’m comfortable using music to illustrate changes over time because, anyone who would claim to enjoy music must, perforce** accept that all music develops from what has come before…

Taylor Swift (2012 or whatever)

(Note: I doubt I even have to mention this, but I have Taylor Swift’s vid up for 2 reasons: a) I like a lot of her stuff and 2) she is very, terribly popular. There are a ton of modern artists out there that may do a better job of supporting my point and there are surely 2000 lbs of musical acts that would contradict my point. However, this Doctrine is about fun. Speaking of fun, free Wakefield Doctrine hat (‘for your damn head’) to anyone who can tell us Ms Swift’s predominant worldview!!***)

Deep Purple (19 ‘yeah, we get that you weren’t even born yet’ 72)

…no, this is not a re-make of ‘This is Spinal Tap’…. that stage is about 12 feet deep and yes, those are ‘roadies’ climbing around the equipment as the band starts playing, since I’ve been to concerts like the one in the vid, I will attest to the fact that the shows were that organized back in the day.

* Rules?!? are there Rules to this here Doctrine here? Well, yes and no.

** yes, I used the word ‘perforce’ did you not read the part about old people?

*** some restriction may apply. This is for old Readers as well as new Readers: you know how you’re with some one, say at the mall or a family reunion or the gym….or even at work and one of you says, ‘man she is such a scott‘ or ‘damn! gots to go deal with what’s his name… what a fricken roger, if I’m not out of his office in 10 minutes find a scott and send them in to rescue me!‘ well, a big part of the fun of this here Doctrine here is to figure the worldview of the people around us, especially when you have someone else who knows the Doctrine. I’ll say right here, when you decide you know the person’s worldview and the other person says, ‘yeah?! why? Why do you think they’re a clark/scott/roger‘ this is not a negative challenge. This is a part of how we’re all learning to identify the three personality types. ….so, if you and I are sitting in a Taylor Swift concert and you say, “She is clearly a …..” be prepared to provide evidence and I will thank you for it. I may not agree (initially or ever)… but this Wakefield Doctrine is a lot of things to a lot of people, but it is not a ‘damn…I’m not sure, better not say, someone will laugh’ personality theory blog.